Is Muhammad Ali the #1 Heavyweight of all time?

[Fr3$h]

Greatest HW of all time has two different meanings, so there are two different questions.

Does he have the greatest resume/legacy? Probably, yes.

Would he beat Wladimir, Lewis, Vitali? Probably not. Maybe not even contenders like Haye, Peters, Sanders, etc. Shorter modern HWs like Povetkin? Not sure. HE would probably give them trouble.

Overall the HW division has transformed too much since then.

As for the size debate, it's not as simple as saying he was too small.

His height (6'2, 6'3" depending on where you look) would be a marginal disadvantage in today's division but not an impossible one to overcome. Only slightly below average. Not a short guy.

His physique (ripped at 180 lbs, soft at 220, fat at 240) would be a significant disadvantage against someone like Wladimir who is 240 with the physique of a welterweight and awesome punching power or Peters, 260 lbs of muscle with a bull-rushing style that gave Ali problems. I think Ali would get physically bullied a lot more than anyone was capable of back then.

His size COMBINED with his style -- fighting tall and long against less rangy guys -- would be his largest handicap IMO. Suddenly going from the physical specimen of his day to the skinny wuss of our day would require him to completely change it up. It's not his size alone, it's how his size would necessitate a complete change of fighting style.

[LacedUp]

Greatest HW of all time has two different meanings, so there are two different questions.

Does he have the greatest resume/legacy? Probably, yes.

Would he beat Wladimir, Lewis, Vitali? Probably not. Maybe not even contenders like Haye, Peters, Sanders, etc. Shorter modern HWs like Povetkin? Not sure. HE would probably give them trouble.

Overall the HW division has transformed too much since then.

As for the size debate, it's not as simple as saying he was too small.

His height (6'2, 6'3" depending on where you look) would be a marginal disadvantage in today's division but not an impossible one to overcome. Only slightly below average. Not a short guy.

His physique (ripped at 180 lbs, soft at 220, fat at 240) would be a significant disadvantage against someone like Wladimir who is 240 with the physique of a welterweight and awesome punching power or Peters, 260 lbs of muscle with a bull-rushing style that gave Ali problems. I think Ali would get physically bullied a lot more than anyone was capable of back then.

His size COMBINED with his style -- fighting tall and long against less rangy guys -- would be his largest handicap IMO. Suddenly going from the physical specimen of his day to the skinny wuss of our day would require him to completely change it up. It's not his size alone, it's how his size would necessitate a complete change of fighting style.

Ali 180 pounds?

You obviously don't know anything about him - Why don't you take this idiocy onto NSB?

Also, lol at Peters bullying Ali. The guy was probably beat by James Toney in his prime.

[Weltschmerz]

Who I ask are those huge guys in todays division?

Just a look over the top 10 tells me that:

a 6'2" guy is ranked #2 in Povetkin. Pulev 6'4, Jennings 6'2, Perez 6', Arreola, 6'1, Stiverne 6'2, Chisora 6', Adamek 6'1.

And Ali at 6'3 is too small?

He didn't have the natural physique of today's big boys. He was sort of the same dimensions like Davey, just with an overall better skill set. Slimmish chance vs Wladimir. He would be a top contender, though, but not the main man.

[Weltschmerz]

Greatest HW of all time has two different meanings, so there are two different questions.

Does he have the greatest resume/legacy? Probably, yes.

Would he beat Wladimir, Lewis, Vitali? Probably not. Maybe not even contenders like Haye, Peters, Sanders, etc. Shorter modern HWs like Povetkin? Not sure. HE would probably give them trouble.

Overall the HW division has transformed too much since then.

As for the size debate, it's not as simple as saying he was too small.

His height (6'2, 6'3" depending on where you look) would be a marginal disadvantage in today's division but not an impossible one to overcome. Only slightly below average. Not a short guy.

His physique (ripped at 180 lbs, soft at 220, fat at 240) would be a significant disadvantage against someone like Wladimir who is 240 with the physique of a welterweight and awesome punching power or Peters, 260 lbs of muscle with a bull-rushing style that gave Ali problems. I think Ali would get physically bullied a lot more than anyone was capable of back then.

His size COMBINED with his style -- fighting tall and long against less rangy guys -- would be his largest handicap IMO. Suddenly going from the physical specimen of his day to the skinny wuss of our day would require him to completely change it up. It's not his size alone, it's how his size would necessitate a complete change of fighting style.

Great post man.

Ali would get bullied in our day and age, hell even back in the 90s he would most probably get steam rolled by the top dogs.

People wearing rose tainted glasses live in denial while they keep romanticizing the past in a state of pure nostalgia.

[Fr3$h]

Ali 180 pounds?

You obviously don't know anything about him - Why don't you take this idiocy onto NSB?

Ali/Clay won an olympic medal at 81 kg (178) lbs and weighed in at 188 lbs as a professional against Alex Miteff, 9 fights into his career. Most of the weight he put on after 200 lbs was soft.

Don't worry, this is what I've come to expect from "golden age" fanatics; you watched his 2 best fights on ESPN Classic, right? You're an expert now.

Ali also lost to little Henry Cooper by KO in a fight where he should have been disqualified 3 different times (carried to his corner after being knocked out at the bell, used smelling salts, trainers cut his gloves open to waste time on a "replacement" while Ali was still incoherent minutes later).

That's another reason you can't directly compare today's boxers to yesterday's; it was a shady mafia circus sideshow.

I'm a hater doe. Don't listen to him he a hater!!

[Weltschmerz]

A lot of people want to credit Ali too much, simply because of his legendary status.

But if you analyze things deeper, you will come to find that a lot of his status comes by chance, by lucky circumstances at the time. By his luck in REMATCHES.

Imagine the following,

Ali loses to Frazier (as he did in their first fight) but would never rematch Frazier.

Ali loses to Ken Norton (as he did in their first fight) but would never rematch Norton.

Ali loses to Leon Spinks (as he did in their first fight) but would never rematch Spinks.

Ali wins against Sonny Liston but then loses in the rematch instead of winning by a ridiculous gift stoppage.

Ali wins against Foreman, gives Foreman a rematch and (very likely) loses the rematch
Foreman annihilates Ken Norton and Joe Frazier (as he indeed did, KO2 and KO2)

Leon Spinks ends his career with a bummy record of 26-16 (= Spinks' record without the Ali rematch)

It would be completely and utterly clear for anybody, that Ali is merely a B level boxer, who has hardly ever beaten convincingly a top opponent and who has the greatest difficulties "against such tomato cans like Norton, Frazier or Spinks", whereas Foreman is clearly the top dog of the 1970s having beaten all bigger names.

It's only because Ali was lucky enough to be given a rematch against Frazier, Norton and Spinks to avenge his losses.

And it's only because Ali REFUSED to give Foreman a rematch so that Ali's aura of superiority could continue to shine.

Ali was simply lucky he didn't live in times of countless TV channels, governing bodies and boxing promoters like is the case nowadays.

And it's exactly the non-rematching of Wladimir Klitschko vs Ross Puritty and Wladimir Klitschko vs Corrie Sanders and of Vitali Klitschko vs Chris Byrd that feeds AliFants and Klitschko haters to this very day.

Ali's rematching is _THE_ major reason for Ali's resume being considered a top resume. Without his rematches he would have a completely different level of resume with a far worse Win-Fight-ratio and far less world titles won.

[LacedUp]

Ali/Clay won an olympic medal at 81 kg (178) lbs and weighed in at 188 lbs as a professional against Alex Miteff, 9 fights into his career. Most of the weight he put on after 200 lbs was soft.

Don't worry, this is what I've come to expect from "golden age" fanatics; you watched his 2 best fights on ESPN Classic, right? You're an expert now.

Ali also lost to little Henry Cooper by KO in a fight where he should have been disqualified 3 different times (carried to his corner after being knocked out at the bell, used smelling salts, trainers cut his gloves open to waste time on a "replacement" while Ali was still incoherent minutes later).

That's another reason you can't directly compare today's boxers to yesterday's; it was a shady mafia circus sideshow.

I'm a hater doe. Don't listen to him he a hater!!

A lot of people want to credit Ali too much, simply because of his legendary status.

But if you analyze things deeper, you will come to find that a lot of his status comes by chance, by lucky circumstances at the time. By his luck in REMATCHES.

Imagine the following,

Ali loses to Frazier (as he did in their first fight) but would never rematch Frazier.

Ali loses to Ken Norton (as he did in their first fight) but would never rematch Norton.

Ali loses to Leon Spinks (as he did in their first fight) but would never rematch Spinks.

Ali wins against Sonny Liston but then loses in the rematch instead of winning by a ridiculous gift stoppage.

Ali wins against Foreman, gives Foreman a rematch and (very likely) loses the rematch
Foreman annihilates Ken Norton and Joe Frazier (as he indeed did, KO2 and KO2)

Leon Spinks ends his career with a bummy record of 26-16 (= Spinks' record without the Ali rematch)

It would be completely and utterly clear for anybody, that Ali is merely a B level boxer, who has hardly ever beaten convincingly a top opponent and who has the greatest difficulties "against such tomato cans like Norton, Frazier or Spinks", whereas Foreman is clearly the top dog of the 1970s having beaten all bigger names.

It's only because Ali was lucky enough to be given a rematch against Frazier, Norton and Spinks to avenge his losses.

And it's only because Ali REFUSED to give Foreman a rematch so that Ali's aura of superiority could continue to shine.

Ali was simply lucky he didn't live in times of countless TV channels, governing bodies and boxing promoters like is the case nowadays.

And it's exactly the non-rematching of Wladimir Klitschko vs Ross Puritty and Wladimir Klitschko vs Corrie Sanders and of Vitali Klitschko vs Chris Byrd that feeds AliFants and Klitschko haters to this very day.

Ali's rematching is _THE_ major reason for Ali's resume being considered a top resume. Without his rematches he would have a completely different level of resume with a far worse Win-Fight-ratio and far less world titles won.

[LacedUp]

He didn't have the natural physique of today's big boys. He was sort of the same dimensions like Davey, just with an overall better skill set. Slimmish chance vs Wladimir. He would be a top contender, though, but not the main man.

If only Ali had the "physical dimensions" of today's boys.

Chris "I eat you" Arreola and "Fastfood" Eddie Chambers.



Ali beat Plenty of big guys like Terrell who was similar size to Wladimir Klitschko.

It's a completely illogical thing to say that Ali wouldn't have beaten the guys of today when he beat actually skilled, big tough fighters with far better resume's than anything incl. the klitschko's have today.

[Weltschmerz]

The David Haye of the 60s. A good cruiserweight. A wuss by todays HW standards. And you got him permanently inked on your chicken arm

[Fr3$h]

Awesome picture of Ali at a point in his career where he would not have made the minimum weight to fight at heavyweight today.

Ripped to shreds at modern heavyweight:



6 ft Joe Frazier with a gut like 6'9 Tyson Fury (Frazier, by the way, was a great fighter, sorry to pick on him, but these guys were not "ripped" or "lean")



Good read:


Average weight of Ali's opponents: 204 lbs
That's 204 lbs (straight up), no cutting, so most of those guys would cut to 175 nowadays or be very small cruiserweights.